In defense of re-electing Stevens

I’m an independent who voted for Ted Stevens.

Voting for a convicted felon? I’ve got to be kidding, right? How did it come to this?

I think back to many years ago when a national legislator from the East was convicted on corruption charges, but reelected by his home state. I was appalled. To me, it was a sad statement about the values and naivety of his electorate. Have I changed my values? Have I become small-minded? I don’t think so. My vote is a response to a complex, dangerous world. I believe many Alaskans, particularly long-time residents, have a similar vista.

I see a world that is in danger of losing its history and the respect for Stevens it should assign him. Any fair analysis of Alaska history would put Ted Stevens right at the top of people who have done the most for the state.

Community after community has been impacted by his work. He has had a vision for Alaska and knows how to get there. He specialized in developing long-term infrastructures when others saw only immediate needs. He has been uncompromising, a bully and stubborn. Yet his insurmountable determination and dedication have produced great fruit. Much of the Last Frontier’s successful development and many of our benefits as citizens are the result of Ted’s efforts. This history demands recognition and our great respect. Disrespect and ignorance are dismaying.

But what about the current Ted? Is he an effective lawmaker?

He is still a major force in the Senate. He is one of the most talented legislators alive. He knows how to get what he wants. Criticisms center on what he gets, not his ability. His agenda is still Alaska. For example, this last year he addressed and solved the major Medicare problem in our state. Many legislators can not produce such significant legislation in their entire careers. Convincing Congress to revise Medicare rules for your state is not easy. Yet, it is barely a blip in Ted’s career.

We have come to expect Congress will succumb to his reason and manipulation to the betterment of Alaska. We shouldn’t. Many in Congress are frustrated by his effectiveness and want him and his Alaska agenda gone. Some scoff and say he is out of touch, spoiled and dated and point to things like his “bridge to nowhere.” But even in this he demonstrates his commitment to our state and shows his long-range thinking.

Few knowledgeable Alaskans would challenge the long-term benefits of a bridge in Ketchikan. Is this the right time, is this the way to do it? These are the real issues. Short-sighted people are blind to his vision.

Then there is corruption. Stevens was on trial for twisting the truth. The government makes these charges, but denies his right to a trial by peers in Alaska, withholds evidence that his team was entitled to and knowingly introduces false evidence. He is tried by a jury where one member lies in order to leave for a horse racing trip and the others are squabbling and wanting to dismiss a member for violence. Yet their verdict is unanimous.

The lying juror makes prejudicial statements against all politicians saying they are all guilty. Who should be on trial in all of this?

Several of Stevens’ reported misdeeds are to me also suspect. For example, Ted did not report getting a car from (former VECO CEO Bill) Allen. He gave Allen his classic mustang and $6,000 in exchange for an almost new SUV, but did not report the SUV as a gift. The Blue Book figures may reflect that Stevens received a gift, but for many big boy car buffs this is insane. The value of a car depends on the particular buyer and seller. Ask a car salesman.

But what about Stevens’ character? I don’t know the man personally, but I’ve watched him carefully over the years. During this time I have watched politician after politician say one thing and do another. I have watched them twist the truth. This is not Stevens’ style. He has mustered some of the most respected character witnesses in the country who agree. He has other faults, but lying does not ring true to who he is.

He is fiercely independent and prides himself in doing what he says and being straight up to the point of being offensive. I could be wrong. He could be a good actor, but the consistent picture is of a guy who is not given to lying or corruption. He trusted a friend, did not confront him and did not pay attention to the details of converting his cabin to a house. I find this very believable. This could be me.

Throughout this campaign the Democratic National Committee has done everything it can to smear and tear down Stevens. Its adds were the most vicious and self-serving I have seen. Talk about disrespect. Talk about twisting truth. The DNC’s campaign was one of the factors that convinced me to vote for Stevens. If we want responsible, upright leadership I would rather bet on Ted.

Begich campaigned as an independent voice and claimed he was able to resist pressure from his party on issues that were not in the best interest of Alaska. He claimed he was going to take the high ground in the campaign against Stevens. Usually he succeeded. Just before the Stevens verdict, however, he ran smear campaigns paralleling the Democratic National Committee’s. He probably bowed to his party’s pressure. Mark, you don’t know how much those ads cost you in the minds of some voters.

All this is in the context of the general media, which was more politically biased in this election than at any time I remember. Rumor became truth. One person’s interpretation (usually someone far removed from the events) became reality. “Truth” was one reporter’s limited sound bite. Dirt was sought after, not discovered. All this was applied unequally. “Saturday Night Live” laughed at the latter while promoting its own spin.

All this to say the media does not have my trust. News about Stevens needs careful scrutiny.

With Stevens’ (pending) re-election, Alaska is making a statement. It is about values, respect, fairness, greed, pressure from outside interests and pressure from the federal government. We are saying we won’t stand for it. We don’t want to be forced into your mold and we believe we know what is best for us.

Unfortunately, the rest of the country probably won’t understand why we voted for Ted. Maybe a good journalist will attempt to tell the real story and the media will actually push it, but I doubt it. I anticipate we will just be labeled as weird, insular, corrupt and stupid. So be it. Me, I’m just glad I can be an Alaskan.

John Nielsen is a Palmer resident.